[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Re: 06 Dec SCI Meeting: Actions/Notes
Dear Anne, I apologize but I am not sure I understand your comment. I had thought that Item 2, Deferral of Motions, was actually agreed to at the meeting on the 14th of November, which Wolf-Ulrich confirmed today. The language (the response from the SCI to the Council on this issue) had been sent out with a minor change by J. Scott to the full SCI following the meeting in Toronto. There were no further changes to the response language. Thus, all that is necessary is for Wolf-Ulrich to inform the Council of the result of the discussion using this response as agreed to by the SCI: "The SCI was asked to consider the current GNSO Council informal practice whereby a party may request the deferral of a motion to a later date in those situations where a formal process for a deferral is not specifically provided (for example, certain deferrals are foreseen as part of the GNSO PDP, see http://gnso.icann.org/council/annex-2-pdp-manual-16dec11-en.pdf). The SCI discussed this practice and whether there was a need to create a procedure to formalize this informal practice. After much debate, the SCI concluded that the current practice of allowing for the deferral of motions was done as a matter of courtesy at the discretion of the Chair of the GNSO Council. For this reason, the SCI concluded that there was no need to create a formal procedure at this time. However, the SCI felt that it was necessary to explicitly state that there is no rule that the Chair must always exercise his or her discretion in the affirmative or the negative. Given that the current informal practice is at the discretion of the Chair, the Chair can exercise that same discretion in considering whether to grant or deny any request and can also exercise his or her discretion when determining how to handle any specific situation that may occur with regard to this informal practice.' If I have misunderstood your reference again I apologize. With best regards, Julie From: <Aikman-Scalese>, Anne <AAikman@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxx>> Date: Thursday, December 6, 2012 5:04 PM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>>, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>> Subject: RE: 06 Dec SCI Meeting: Actions/Notes Regarding Item 2, I think it was actually agreed that the proposed change would be put out to the full SCI for comment and that is what in fact happened. [cid:126180322@06122012-1A2F]Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel Lewis and Roca LLP • Suite 700 One South Church Avenue • Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 Tel (520) 629-4428 • Fax (520) 879-4725 AAikman@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxx> • www.LewisandRoca.com/Aikman<http://www.lewisandroca.com/Aikman> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. This e-mail contains legally privileged and confidential information intended only for the individual or entity named within the message. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. If this communication was received in error, please notify us by reply e-mail and delete theoriginal message. ________________________________ From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx> [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 2:32 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] 06 Dec SCI Meeting: Actions/Notes Dear SCI members, Here are the actions and notes from today's meeting. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Our next meeting will be held in two weeks on Thursday, 20 December at 2000 UTC. A meeting notice will be sent out separately. With best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions: 1. Chair and Vice Chair Election: Glen will send the ballot to the SCI members and alternates. The poll will be open for one week. 2. Deferral of Motions: Wolf-Ulrich will provide the results of the discussion to the GNSO Council. The SCI agreed to J.Scott's proposed language. There is no need for a motion. 3. Raising an Issue: Wolf-Ulrich will provide the results of the discussion to the GNSO Council. SCI members agreed to maintain the status quo. 4. Suspension of a PDP: SCI members will review the proposed revised footnote language (sent via separate email) by COB Monday. The results will determine whether a motion will be submitted to the Council on 12 December. 5. Working Group Survey: SCI members will review the Working Group Guidelines and take the Survey (sent via a separate email) by COB Wednesday, 19 December. Julie will compile the survey results and any comments and provide an update at the meeting on 20 December. Notes: 1. Chair and Vice Chair election: -- Start after today's meeting --Set a deadline of one week -- 13 December --1-year with option to extend 1 year Action: Glen will initiate the ballot. The poll will be open for 1 week. 2. Deferral of Motions: --Agreed to J. Scott's language Action: Wolf-Ulrich will provide the result of the discussion; no need for a motion 3. Motion re: PDP Manual Revision re: Suspension of a PDP: --How can a PDP be resumed? Addressed in the Footnote and include a specific timeline in the motion. --Needs to be specific language so that the language isn't open ended. Or put in a timeline for the motion to include, or a time for resumption, or resumption by majority vote. --Put in "stated" in front ot "time interval" in the footnote as a clarification and not put it out for public comment. Action: Julie will send the revised footnote to the list. Comment requested by Monday the 10th. 4. Raising an issue — Support for option nr 1 — maintain status quo Action: Wolf-Ulrich will put this forward to the Council 5. Status update on Working Group survey" --Is this coming from the latest guidelines -- February 2010? Why not send the Guidelines to every Working Group? Marike: It is the latest version. We do send the guidelines to new Working Groups. There also is a 4-page summary.. Action: SCI members: Review the guildelines and complete the survey. Deadline by 19 December. 6. AOB: Next Meeting; 20 December at the same time.2000 UTC ________________________________ For more information about Lewis and Roca LLP, please go to www.lewisandroca.com<http://www.lewisandroca.com/>. Phoenix (602)262-5311 Reno (775)823-2900 Tucson (520)622-2090 Albuquerque (505)764-5400 Las Vegas (702)949-8200 Silicon Valley (650)391-1380 This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender of this E-Mail by return E-Mail or by telephone. In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that if this email contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. Attachment:
image001.gif
|
